Ahead of the official announcements, Kotaku is reporting potentially leaked details of the eighth generation follow-up, which is expected to launch in time for the holidays this year. The site writes:

Our source—the same reliable source who back in early 2012 told us the codename for Sony's next console and the codename for Microsoft's next console—tells us that there are two models planned for the new machine, and that pricing won't be announced until later this year, possibly around E3. The current plan, our source says, is to release them at $429 and $529, but that could change.

Those prices would be significantly cheaper than the PS3, which launched starting at $499 USD for a 20 GB console.

The console will reportedly get a new controller with a smaller touchpad in the center, and possibly a special button on the controller to share content. The source also indicates that you'll be able to use your tablet or smartphone as a remote control/controller for the console. And you'll be able to run client apps on popular tablets/smartphones to schedule games to download or to chat with your PlayStation Network buddies.

The supposed "leaked" PS4 controller [Image Source: Kotaku]

The new PlayStation will locally network via Vita, and will feature a new service called PlayStation Eye (not to be confused with the Eye Toy) which allows you to watch streams of your friends' playing games (if they allow it). PlayStation Plus will be replaced by PlayStation World; most of the networked services will be only available via this premium option (Microsoft is going a similar route with Xbox Live).

I vote for the age aspect. Additionally, consider how new 'gaming' was when Nintendo 8-bit came out with SNES after it.

Gaming is so mainstream now, of course it doesn't feel the same.

Feature for feature though, there's just no way anyone could EVER say NES > xbox or ps.

The only time that arguement could (IMO is) true is when you evaluate the CONTENT / games. Something did FEEL more fun about the earlier generations, but its not because of a superior / inferior system...

In the past costs were much lower for developers so people weren't sure what to expect. These days it's by the book sequels and excessive focus on cinematic "feeling". People aren't as excited because they've sucked a lot of the fun out of video games in favor of something closer to interactive movies.

Unless you play Dark Souls or Demon Souls. They are exceptions to the rule with amazingly deep gameplay and very little in lengthy, annoying dialogue laden interactions.

Don't get me wrong--dialogue is great, but when you saturate the experience like say Mass Effect 2 did with the obscene amount of talking and the vignettes of gameplay (salted in hour to two hour increments) it gets... annoying.

I just upgraded my PC. I have no interest in another console. Star Citizen is coming. What's that, console kids? Oh, sorry, you don't get to play it. :P

I rather enjoy my "interactive movies". I want a good story. Not 20 hours of mindless blasting with ever more ridiculous weaponry.

My gaming time is limited so I play just the quality titles.

Also waiting for Star Citizen though. I plan to run my own private server for me and my friends. A quad core and 8GB of RAM on a 20Mbps down/15 Mbps up connection should suffice for the server and good ping times for all.

Great point. Production / development costs back then were miniscule compared to today. It takes an extremely large amount of money to produce a game of acceptable quality these days for various reasons, legit and otherwise.

Game play has improved in all sorts of ways since the old days and games are much more imersive and engaging. But don't take my word for it grab one of those amazing games from a couple of decades back and you'll quickly find the game play to be limited and repetitive.

It's not that I don't love the old games be it Galaga, Fort Apocalypse, Manic Miner, Stunt Car Racer, Pole Position, Donkey Kong, Wolfenstein 3D, Zork... but the reality is that when I load them up they are only of limited fun and it's more about the memories.

IMO the game play of the earlier consoles like NES, SNES, and Genesis trumps most current games out there today. Modern games rely too heavily on graphics and multi-player, and don't focus enough on game play and plot.

Without the benefit of modern 3D rendering or high speed internet multiplayer, the old game systems had to rely almost exclusively on a fantastic game play experience to attract customers and keep them hooked.

Every once is a while I will pull out my old Sega Dreamcast and TurboGraphix 16 and play a game. I don't what it is about Bonk, but I love that old game! And for my money, NFL 2K is still better than the current Madden game. And let us not forget about the old DOS games. Go abandonware! I agree with you, old games were about the plot, new games are about overwhelming your senses. Much like movies now. Just because you can does not mean you should.

Those old DOS games had character, too. I still play through Thexder 2: Firehawk periodically as well as System Shock 1. Heck, I'm playing Hero's Quest 1 right now. I love the pre-VGA art from the 1986-1989 era of PC games. It had style and depth to it while containing a unique texture and taste to it. You could see the love the artists put into the games to make them look good (the ones that were done well at least). Take Space Quest 1 EGA/PC Jr. The main town ooozes with original personality.

This is something that is rarely replicated these days, even with all the fancy rendering and powerful hardware.

It is easy to DOS game, too. Just hop on Ebay and pick up a few Roland modules (MT-32, SC-55) and load up Dosbox for the Adlib/Soundblaster emulation. That's all you need. Well, until you get a vintage PC running. Then you're really having fun!